Friday, October 2, 2009
Rupert Murdoch is going to experience a backlash with this idea. A number of independent research studies show this was rated unfavourably amongst those surveyed last week. Even better, Google rejected Murdoch's plan.
In my opinion, publishers will find it very hard to charge for news content because there is so much free content swimming around the world wide web. Sure, the Wall Street Journal, one of the newspapers owned by News Corp started charging its user to read its news online. Some publishers have argued that once upon a time, we paid for a news content. The question is, would you pay for it again?
But seriously, no one would pay for news content, especially if it's coming from news.com.au or ninemsn. There are plenty online news websites which write better content.
I'm curious to know if this scheme goes ahead, how much will they charge users for their content. Perhaps it's like iTunes, paying it per article basis. Whatever they decide, it won't just affect journalists, it will affect us as well.
Charging audience for online news content when they can receive it for free is like charging people to swim at the beach. Or ocean, and it's a huge ocean out there.
Now, what do you think about this proposition?
Posted by Five Foot Nothing at 10:34 AM